geert_de_keyser1

i know you're not going to be happy to hear this but it seems to me you're just fighting a battle with a wrong set of equipment. You are using things that are not really designed to be used like this. I see a lot of people on these fora using equipment against the strengths of the equipment and ending up with nothing but frustration. You don't wanna enter a F1 race with a go cart, no more then you want to enter a go cart race with a F1 car. Use (rent it for that matter) studio flashes, sync cord to your light meter, everything in manual mode and away are your problems. Then comes the real challenge of sculpting with light. Your energy should be here, not in a struggle with equipment. Just my two cents. And if money is a problem, rent the stuff or thank the chinese for producing quite good stuff for hardly any money. Check out falcon eyes, they produce some nice starter kits for probably half the money one of your lenses have cost.

forgot this:

there are indeed velcro's in the package but there is no need to use the velcro's since it will stay over any speedlite i've used with the elastic band that is part of it

I use this a lot and if used properly with a small degree of fill, it can do wonders. Works a lot better and more consistent then bounce. Takes a small time to get it finetuned in your workflow. Also works a hell of a lot better then those plastic boxes to slide over the flash. Bulky? Bulkier then a small bounce card that's for sure, but on an EOS 1Ds with, let's say, a 70-200mm, it doesn't really matter that much anymore. It's cheap, so buy it, play with it and make up your mind according to your results.

i just bought myself a Schneider 90mm SA XL and I know I should just take a few

pics with the lens and then make up my own mind if I feel to need a center

filter for it yes or no, but I just want the two cents you guys have to offer.

Is the center filter going to make a big improvement? In what instances or

situations will I probably feel the need for one? Why don't they design the lens

with a center filter build in to it? I don't quite follow the logic of paying a

lot of money for a lens and then being told "hey, it so happens you need a sort

of filter for it to evenly distribute the light".

thx for the advice

 

i'm sorry for my lack in englisch but what does "funtacking to the groundglass" mean?

Steve simmons has a nice little chart in his book Using the View Camerat that is a great help at figuring out which lenses to buy first (page 40). The chart is made up of First Purchase, Second Purchase and Third Purchase on the top and General Purpose, Architecture, Table Top Studio, Industrial & Corporate, Studio and Environmental on the side. An overall conclusion out of this might be: 210mm as first purchase and 90mm as second if you want to be able to tackle a mixture of assignments. After working with the first two for a while, you will be well placed to decide what to buy next. Just my two cents since I also just recently moved up to LF.

maybe DIY is the best option, all i need is a 6x12 mask on 4x5, the biggest square i can get out of 4x5, a 6x17 out of 5x7, etc... it's scary how quickly my thinking can change, thx for the response

instead of using a rollfilmback i have opted to use masks on the GG, i know i

can make them myself but i don't want to for various reasons, so no need for

"rollfilmbacks lovers" and "DIY mask makers" to try to evangelize me, not

because this option is neceserally the "best one" but since i have already come

to the conclusion that buying masks will suit my working and operating style best

 

btw, i use a sinar p camera (4x5, 5x7, 8x10)

 

i've searched around and it seems to me that i have two options: or i use the

sinar vario mask or i use the set of masks made by Lightware. The vario mask

costs about the double ($100 instead of $50) but that's not really an issue. The

Sinar Vario has the advantage of one size fits all but since the differences in

size are marked by two small orange plastic tubes sliding to various positions

inside the 6x12 frame i'm worried that seeing a portion of what falls outside

off the image will be distracting. The advantage over the Lightware masks are

that the Vario will be easily positioned and will stay in place without the

"funtak" that is needed according to the Lightware website to keep those masks

in place. What are your findings in using both? Are there other mask options?

 

Another question on the mask thing!

I don't seem to be able to find some masks being sold voor 5x7 and 8x10 sinar

groundglasses. Am I not looking properly or will I be forced to DIY here?

 

any help is welcome, thx in advance

 

- pics of sinar vario: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7627959782

 

- pic of the 9 mask Lightware set:

http://www.lightwareinc.com/site/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.product_display&Prod_ID=242&Cat_Name=GripStrip&Cat_ID=19

Helen, I like you, girl!

to balance daylight or tungsten film for fluorescent lighting Tiffen sells its

FLD or FLB filters but I've read here and elsewhere that those filters can't

quiet do the job and a lot people are suggesting using a 30 or 40 Magenta. what

is wrong with the tiffen set and what are your findings for balancing for

fluorescent?

let's assume that those fluo tubes are not windows, i've seen her do it in a number of occasions where she had her lightfixtures emanating a pure white light in a room that was lit by large windows or cupola's

 

joe, what do you mean by "simple time exposure"?

pico, what does a high key effect have to do with mixing color temperatures in one space or am i missing something?

pierre, would you actually cover all the thirtysomething windows with filters to balance the outside light with the fluo tubes?

i was talking about the lightfixtures lining the walls below the tvscreens, or are these also small windows? the light fixtures on the ceiling are not on

look at the enclosed picture of famous dusseldorf school photographer candida

hofer (see attachment). i'm wondering how she did this, there is clearly

daylight coming through the windows in the roof of the room but there is also

clearly artificial light from the light fixtures in the room, how did she do

this? i don't think that she had the lamps changed to 5500 K lamps, that's just

not her. The only way I think one could do this is, come in before dawn and

shoot the scene with the lights on and light balancing filter on the lens and

then turn the lights off, wait until daylight comes in and then do a second

exposure. If this is the case, how can you figure out to divide the exposures?

If this is not the case, how would you guys do this?

thx for all the advice, i think i will be going for the Lee polariser (rotating linear 105mm diameter), i take it that one can see the changes on the ground glass? how do you guys compensate for exposure with a polariser on a LF camera?

a few questions about polarisers, i'm thinking of buying one but not sure which

way to go, any help is welcome.

 

what is the difference between a linear and circular polariser? what kind do you

guys use on your LF cameras? pros and cons? one polariser for each filter size

or the lee polariser that fits all filter sizes by means of different sized lens

rings? does anyone have any experience with this Lee polariser? in what cases do

you guys believe not to go without a polariser? can the polariser be replaced by

some photoshop work?

i bought a second hand linhof unversal finder. it is supposed to be for 4x5

(settings from 90 to 360) and 5x7 (120-500). i can turn its front ring so it can

go from horizontal to vertical and back, i can also turn the backwheel from

infinity to 0.5 meter. i can see two rectangles on through the finder, one that

is the edge of the frame and the other inside of it all. my questions! which one

of these is for 4x5? why is it a rectangle and not a near square like 4x5? what

does the lower wheel do that turns from infinity to 0.5m? i see that it tilts

the finder a bit but i can't see any real differences in the finder, any help is

welcome

Look at some production stills of some of Gregory Crewdson's work. It always looks like a major motion picture movie set, streets are blocked, lighting trucks in the nearby streets, a little army of crew people running about, cherry pickers high up in the air with huge lights. Buying a few HMIs is not going to cut it. My advice, if you got the budget, rent the equipment and rent the crew. Or you could dig deep into yourself and come up with a piece of original art then you might not need huge HMI's to do a Gregory Crewdson.

It's robust, it's Sinar, it's hard to break. Just wrap it in bubble plastic and ship the damn thing, don't try taking it apart.

Michael is right. This is a very famous Jeff Wall piece, "A Sudden Gust of Wind (After Hokusai) (1993)", it's very big, 4 meters x 2,5 meters and it's a transparency display case about 30cm thick. This photograph was inspired by a print by the nineteenth century Japanese artist named Hokusai. They both depict a group of people watching sheets of paper being blown away by the wind. As a lot of recent Jeff Wall work it is a digital composite, it took them months to get it all just right; especially the pieces of paper. For a lot of his recent pieces he shoots the 'little scenes' (the postures of the individuals for instance) in the studio and then composites it all digitally. But I'm a little dissapointed in your question, out of all the questions you could have asked about this piece of modern art, you choose the blatant, photoclub-dude-like one: "what film did he use". Does it matter? He could have used almost any slide or negative film or any digital back, it doesn't matter, it's not about the material, it's about the art.

What do you guys use to dry your 4x5 or 8x10 negatives? Do you use the same

drying 'machines' as for 35mm and medium format or something else? Any info is

welcome.

Has anyone got any dev times and data on developping Efke/Adox films in Tanol?

www.monochrom.de

I noticed that there are three sorts of 545 polaroid backs around. What are the

differences? And is the pro version worth the extra euros?

What are the differences between the Fidelity Elite and Fidelity Astra film

holders? The Astras are sold a bit more expensive but where are the differences?

Is it just that the Astras print a number on your film or is there more to it?

And how do they compare to the Liscos that are even a little bit more expensive

then the Astras?

First of all, let me also state my thanx to you all for making my step up to LF

a little bit smoother. I have bought a second hand lens, the 210mm MC 5.6

CaltarII-N. I understand the focal length and the 5.6 aperture. The MC stands

for multicoated I gather so that is a good thing. What I don't understand is the

CaltarII-N. Isn't this a Rodenstock lens but why the Caltar monniker? And what

with the II-N? Does anybody have any additional info on this lens? Image circle,

angle of view, etc? How does it compare to modern Schneider lenses? Anything is

welcome!